District Council 50 of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades v. Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs ( 2014 )

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCPW-13-0005089
08-JAN-2014
01:41 PM
SCPW-13-0005089
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
DISTRICT COUNCIL 50 OF THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PAINTERS AND
ALLIED TRADES and ALOHA GLASS SALES & SERVICE, INC.,
Petitioners,
vs.
KEALI#I S. LOPEZ, in her capacity as Director,
Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(SCWC-28762)
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF
PROHIBITION OR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(By: Nakayama, Acting C.J., McKenna, J., and Circuit Judge Kim,
in place of Recktenwald, C.J., recused, Circuit Judge To#oto#o,
in place of Acoba, J., recused, and Circuit Court Sakamoto
in place of Pollack, J., recused)
Upon consideration of petitioners District Council 50,
of the International Union Painters and Allied Trades and Aloha
Glass Sales & Service, Inc.’s petition for a writ of prohibition
or a writ of mandamus, filed on November 6, 2013, the documents
attached thereto and submitted in support thereof, and the
record, it appears that petitioners have alternative means to
seek relief from the State of Hawai#i Contractors License Board’s
interpretation of this court’s opinion in District Council 50 et
al. v. Lopez, 129 Hawai#i 281, 298 P.3d 1045 (2013).
Petitioners, therefore, are not entitled to extraordinary relief.
See Kema v. Gaddis, 91 Hawai#i 200, 204-05, 982 P.2d 334, 338-39
(1999) (a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that will
not issue unless the petitioner demonstrates a clear and
indisputable right to relief and a lack of alternative means to
redress adequately the alleged wrong or obtain the requested
action); Honolulu Adv., Inc. v. Takao, 59 Haw. 237, 241, 580 P.2d
58, 62 (1978) (a writ of prohibition “is an extraordinary remedy
. . . to restrain a judge of an inferior court from acting beyond
or in excess of his jurisdiction” and is not meant to serve as a
legal remedy in lieu of normal appellate procedures).
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
prohibition or a writ of mandamus is denied.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, January 8, 2014.
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Glenn J. Kim
/s/ Fa#auuga To#oto#o
/s/ Karl K. Sakamoto